sounds like members of NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love association)would be very comfortable in Austria.
from Southpark
Their rape laws require proving something that the lower court did not prove, so the conviction was tossed pending a new trial.
This is called the rule of law, and it's working fine.
Don't like the law? Push to change it.
“Nostalgia was like a disease, one that crept in and stole the colour from the world and the time you lived in. Made for bitter people. Dangerous people, when they wanted back what never was.” -- Steven Erikson, The Crippled God
didn't say he wasn't maybe he was both. I knew youd come back with do your research. http://www.bruceonpolitics.com/2016/...red-to-hitler/ .the quote alone tells you im right.
I mean are you simple?
Let me put this really clearly for you.
Pete has sex with a 15 year old, Pete gets arrested and sent to prison for sexually abusing a child. Pete was 19 and the girl was his GF, she "consented" in as much as she wanted it.
Dave forced a 15 year old to have sex with him. They want to make sure Dave gets a more serious sentence than Pete, because on top of having sex with an underage he raped her. So they make provisions in the law for this. Its a bit more like a standard rape trial on top of the statutory rape trial, to prove the girl didn't consent.
Do you understand this?
It just sounds like they're going to retry the case while the guy is still in prison in the mean time.
Actually, what he is arguing is that the Supreme Court are merely fulfilling their role.
In their understanding of the law...the Prosecution's case did not meet with the standards set.
They are not saying that the boy may have given consent...legally speaking, he cannot do that. That's why the conviction of sexual abuse stands.
They are saying that prosecution did not make the case that the boy was an unwilling participant and the the accused used force against him.